2015-16 Budget and Rural Development

            Notwithstanding growing urbanization in the last decade or two, India still live in Six lakh villages and rightly the 2015-16 general budget, the first full year budget of Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly gives the due attention to Rural Development coupled with increased allocation to the farm sector. Several new initiatives have been launched by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in the budget, which has gone unnoticed. The overall plan expenditure may look lower but one should not forget that with the implementation of 14^th finance commission recommendations, the states get clear 10 per cent more share of central pool of taxes at 42 per cent giving substantial hike in resources that are untied thereby helping states to design and provide more resources in those rural programmes that require more money. Jaitley has also provided significant resources for rural development. Apart from specific allocation of Rs 79,526 crore for rural development, several initiatives and allocations for infrastructure, railways and social schemes for poor will benefit rural folks as these investments are going to be for 60 per cent of 1.2 billion populations living in rural areas.

            As Jaitley himself said in his budget speech in Parliament on February 28 that with the economy turning around “dramatically” in the nine months of Modi government coupled with restoration of macro-economic stability, conditions have been created for stepping on the pedals for sustainable poverty elimination, job creation and durable double-digit economic growth, which meant more rural prosperity in the country.

            The first and foremost achievement of this government is success of Jan Dhan Yojana in a short period of 100 days. Through this financial inclusion programme 12.5 crore unbanked families, mostly in rural areas have been brought into the financial mainstream, thereby providing much needed launching pad for carrying out successfully various social programmes particularly for rural poor. This has led to launch of game changing JAM Trinity programme – Jan Dhan, Aadhar and Mobile—to implement direct transfer of benefits mostly to rural poor in a leakage-proof, well targeted and cashless manner. This is a significant development. In fact the leakage in social schemes has been so much that they have not had the desired result in the 6-7 decades of economic development since independence. As late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi himself said only 16 paise reached the beneficiary from every rupee spent. Rajiv Gandhi made this observation 25 years ago and it has not become any better, perhaps marginally better as leakage and corruption is widespread even today. JAM will ensure that the rural schemes are more effective, efficient and better targeted. The budget also puts in place a roadmap that aims at double-digit economic growth that is “feasible very soon”. greatly benefitting rural India through inclusive growth.  In this regard, financial inclusion is going to be a major tool and Jan Dhan Yojana is going to facilitate in a great measure.

            “In respect of social and economic indicators, for seven decades now, we have worked in terms of percentages and numbers of beneficiaries covered, it is quite obvious that incremental change is not going to take anywhere. We have to think in terms of a quantum jump,” Jaitley observed and announced several out-of-box ideas to transform rural India.

He unveiled a 13-point agenda that is to be implemented by 2022, the 75^th year of independence with a sizeable rural component. This comprise a roof for each family in India—that is six crore houses to be built of which 4 crore houses in rural areas with 24-hour power, clean drinking water, a toilet and road connectivity. Electrification of all the remaining 20,000 villages in the country by 2020. Connecting each of 1,78,000 unconnected habitations by all weather roads. This meant completing one lakh km of rorad currently under construction and building of additional one lakh km of road. Increasing farm productivity through irrigation and other measures. To bring on par North Eastern and Easter regions, which are at present lagging behind particularly in economic development.

Jaitley said in spite of the large increase in the devolution to states due to the recommendations of 14^th finance commission, adequate provision is being made for the schemes for the poor with allocation of Rs 68,968 crore to the education sector including mid-day meals, Rs 33,152 crore to the health sector and Rs 79,526 crore for Rural development activities including Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee programme, Rs 22,407 crore for housing, Rs 10,351 crore for women and child development, Rs 4,173 crore for Water Resources and Namami Ganga (cleaning of the river). A Substantial amount under these heads will go for the development of villages.

Apart from ensuring that farm credit is raised to Rs 8.5 lakh crore next fiscal year from Rs 8 lakh crore this financial year, the government committed to Rs 34, 699 crore for MGNREGA, which would be further stepped up  if needed to ensure that no one, who is poor in rural India is left without employment. MGNREGA will also help in benchmarking rural wages at a higher level and promote rural consumption that will help kick-starting economy to achieve 8-8.5  per cent growth in 2015-16 and then move on to double-digit growth.

            While the farmer is no longer in the clutches of the local trader and to increase kisan’s income, government proposed to create a unified national agriculture market. The problem at present is that India has thousands of mandis at present and as a result the prices of farm produce goes up by 15-20 per cent benefitting several middlemen thereby benefitting neitherthe poor farmer or consumer. To fund the unfunded, Jaitley proposed to create a Micro Units Development Refinance Agency (Mudra) Bank. This is a major attempt to generate employment in rural areas particularly in weaker sections of the society. There are 5.77 crore small business units, mostly individual proprietorship, which run small manufacturing, trading or service businesses. Sixty-two per cent are owned by scheduled castes, scheduled tribes or other backward communities. Mudra bank will have a corpuse of Rs 20,000 crore and credit guarantee corpus of Rs 3,000 crore. Mudra bank will refinance micro finance institutions through a Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana. Jaitley said these measures will greatly increase the confidence of young, educated or skilled workers, who would now be able to aspire to become first generation entrepreneurs; existing small businesses, too, will be ale to expand their activieties. “Just as we are banking theun-banked, we are also funding theun-funded,” he said.

            Working capital requirement of micro, small and medium enterprises, located substantially in rural areas will also get a boost with the establishment of Electronic Trade Receivables Discounting system soon. This will be help in financing of trade receivables of MSMEs, from corporate and other buyers, through multiple financiers. This should improve the liquidity in the MSME sector significantly. To increase access to the formal financial system government proposed to utilize the vast postal network with nearly 1,54,000 points of presence spread across villages of the country. “I hope that the Postal Department will make its proposed payments bank venture successful so that if contributes further to the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana.

            The budget also steps up allocation for rural health and social security. To promote jan Suraksha, Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojna will be launched soon to cover accidental risk of Rs 2 lakh for a premium of just Rs 12 per year. Similarly Atal pension yojana, which will provide defined pension, depending on the contribution and its period. Government will contribute 50 per cent of the benefciaries’ premium limited to Rs 1000 each year for five years in the new accounts to be opened in the next nine months. Government also proposed to create senior citizen welfare fund utilizing unclaimed deposits of about Rs 9,000 crore in Public Provident Fund and Employees Provident Fund.  The corpus will be utilized to subsidize the premium of vulnerable groups such as old age pensioners, BPL card-holders, small and marginal farmers and others. Details of the scheme will be announced later this month. This social security schemes will largely benefit rural population. Of the 10.5 crore senior citizens in the country, seventy per cent live in rural areas and a large number are in rural areas.

            The Budget also allocates Rs one lakh crore allocation to National Bank for Agricultgure and Rural development will have positive impact on the rural infrastructure. The long-term credit fund has been provided 15,000 crore in the next financial from Rs 5000 crore in the current financial year. This will help in pushing agro-based rural industries. Rural roads get Rs 25,000 crore allocation.

            The Modi government has quietly stepped rural development and agriculture in the budget under various heads, which has apparently gone unnoticed giving credence to the opposition criticism that this year’s budget is mainly for corporate and the middle class. In fact there are several initiatives and one has to read the fine print of the budget as the initiatives are spread across various departments and if they are implemented in right earnest, it will transform the rural India into a vibrant economy.

#ROTAVAC-Desi Rotaviral Vaccine with Global Reach

The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, launched the first indigenously developed and manufactured Rotavirus vaccine: 'Rotavac’, yesterday. This indigenously developed vaccine will boost efforts to combat infant mortality due to diarrhoea. 

Each year, diarrhoea caused by rotavirus results up to 10 lakh hospitalizations and kills nearly 80 thousand children under the age of 5 years. Besides causing emotional stress to the affected families, it also pushes many Indian families below the poverty line and also imposes significant economic burden on the country.

        What is Rotavirus infection?

Rotavirus is the most common cause of severe diarrheal (gastro enteritis) disease in infants and young children globally. Children under five years of age, especially those between 6 months and two years are most vulnerable to this disease. Rotaviruses are estimated to be responsible for approximately 5, 27,000 deaths each year, with more than 85% of these deaths occurring in low-income countries in Africa and Asia, and over two million are hospitalized each year with pronounced dehydration.

Among 43 countries participating in the Global Surveillance Network for rotavirus in 2009, 36% of hospitalizations for diarrhea among children aged below 5 years were caused by rotavirus infection. Rotavirus affects populations in all socio-economic groups and is equally prevalent in industrialized and developing countries. So differences in sanitation practices or water supply are not likely to affect the incidence of the infection.

Rotavirus

 The name Rotavirus comes from the characteristic wheel-like appearance of the virus when viewed by electron microscope (the name rotavirus is derived from the Latin word Rota, meaning "wheel”). Rota viral diarrhea is an infection of the stomach and bowel. It spreads when infected children do not maintain proper personal hygiene. Virus spreads by contact or airborne route. Most cases of gastroenteritis in children are mild and usually pass within 3-5 days without the need for treatment. However, young children, particularly those under two years of age, are at risk of dehydration. So it is very important that they drink plenty of fluids. In severe cases of gastroenteritis, where there has been significant fluid loss, hospital treatment may be required so that fluid can be replaced through drips.

   The first rotavirus infection tends to be the most severe because the body builds up immunity (resistance) to the virus afterwards. This is why these types of infections are extremely rare in adults. It is estimated that every child will have at least one rotavirus infection before the age of five. Most infections occur among children aged between three months and three years old.

Indian Scenario

In India, nationally representative data on the incidence of severe rota virus disease is lacking. However, studies have revealed that on an average 34% of all diarrheal hospitalizations are due to rota virus infection and the proportion of severe rota viral infection has not decreased in the last few years, similar to the global trend indicating that improved sanitation and use of anti-biotics have not been effective on rota virus. The prevalence of Rota virus in new born is high in India to the extent of 73%, but these infections are normally a- symptomatic and the likelihood of acquiring infection increases with the length of stay in the hospital.

While some studies in India have found no association between rotavirus infection and time of year, most have observed an increase in rotavirus-associated diarrhea during the winter months, October to February, throughout the country. The observed proportion of rotavirus cases occurring in the cooler season has ranged from 59% to 72%.

Treatment & Prevention

No specific treatment exists for rotavirus gastroenteritis, and repeat infections are common in children. Since 2006, vaccines are available for rotavirus infection. Prior to the availability of a vaccine, almost all children became infected with rotavirus by their third birthday. Repeat infections with different viral strains were possible. After several infections with different strains of the virus, children acquire immunity to rotavirus. Adults sometimes get infected, but the resulting illness is usually mild.

Vaccination

Use of vaccine should be part of a comprehensive diarrhoeal disease control strategy including, among other interventions, improvements of hygiene and sanitation, administration of oral rehydration solution and overall improved case management.

The new vaccine ROTAVAC has been developed under an innovative public-private partnership model. It involved partnership between the Ministry of Science and Technology, the institutions of the US Government, various government institutions and NGOs in India, supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Funding by Government of India supported basic research in educational and scientific institutions in India. This was also supplemented by the support of U.S. Government institutions like the National Institute of Health. The Gates Foundation and Bharat Biotech India Limited contributed towards product development and testing. The successful launch of the first indigenously developed and produced vaccine today was the result of an extraordinary effort spread over the last 25 years. .

The Bharat Biotech India Limited that was involved in the development and production of the vaccine was selected in 1997-1998 by the India-U.S. Vaccine Action Programme and the standard government procedures. The company has given undertaking to keep the cost of the vaccine at US$ 1 per dose. This is the third such vaccine available globally against Rotavirus and, at the current prices, the cheapest and cost effective in terms of disability adjusted life year that satisfy the WHO/ UNICEF criteria for a cost- effective  intervention.

 ROTAVAC is an oral vaccine and is administered to infants in a three-dose course at the ages of 6, 10, and 14 weeks. It is given alongside routine immunizations in the UIP vaccines recommended at these ages.. Improving the overall performance of the immunization system is critical to the success of any vaccine introduction.

ROTAVAC represents the successful research and development of a novel vaccine from the developing world with global standards. The Prime Minister lauded this initiative as an example of India's capabilities for high-end research and development; manufacture of sophisticated pharmaceutical products in India; and, effective Public-Private-Partnership model for finding affordable solutions to societal challenges.

He hoped that the development of the rotavirus vaccine would inspire higher levels of research, development and manufacturing activities in India, not just in medical science, but also in other advanced areas of science and technology. On the launch occasion Prime Minister felt that solutions found in India would have great relevance to the rest of the world, especially the developing world.

India stands seventh in number of reactors in operation and fourteenth in terms of net installed capacity among countries with nuclear power

At present India stands seventh in number of reactors in operation and fourteenth in terms of net installed capacity among countries with nuclear power. It is third in number of reactors under construction and sixth in terms of net capacity under construction. India has developed comprehensive capabilities in all aspects of nuclear power including siting, design, construction, commissioning, operation & maintenance, renovation &modernisation and life extension of nuclear power plants. Its safety record over 45 years of operation has been impeccable with no accident or instance of release of radioactivity in the public domain beyond stipulated limits. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL)’s reactors have been operated consistently at high Availability Factors and demonstrated operation at high Plant Load Factors. In terms of continuous operation, NPCIL reactors have operated for more than a year seventeen times with one reactor, Rajasthan Atomic Power Station Unit 5 (RAPS-5) setting a record of 765 days of continuous operation, second largest in the world. The nuclear power programme will continue to be pursued to add more capacity in future.

Report on Roadmap for Reduction in Import Dependency in the Hydrocarbon Sector released

The central government had constituted aCommittee (Chair: Mr. Vijay Kelkar) to prepare aroadmap for enhancing domestic oil and gasproduction and for sustainable reduction in import
dependency by 2030. The Committee submittedits final report in September 2014.17

Key recommendations of the Committee include:

 Expediting appraisal of Indian basins shouldbe done through: (i) the creation of a National
Data Repository, (ii) the introduction of anOpen Acreage Licensing Policy at the
earliest, (iii) providing operators withflexibility in completion of Minimum Work
Programme, and (iv) giving companies theRight of First Refusal (ROFR) as an incentive
for conducting basin appraisal. ROFR is thecontractual right of a company to enter into a
business transaction before anyone else can,and if they refuse, bidding for the asset can be
opened up to other interested parties.
 Enhancing domestic production of oil and gasby: (i) developing a Production Sharing
Contract model instead of the revenue sharingcontract model and subsequently bringing in
administrative reforms and contract stability,(ii) removing subsidy burden on exploitation
of mature oil fields, and (iv) encouraging coalgasification, which can provide an important
non-conventional source of oil and gas.
 Bringing in institutional reforms by: (i)constituting an empowered cabinet committee
on energy for policy formulation,  (ii)transforming and empowering the Directorate
General of Hydrocarbons to become anindependent regulator, and (iii) undertaking
fiscal reforms such as including oil and gasunder the recently proposed Goods and
Services Tax framework.
 Creating a roadmap for transition to marketdetermined
gas pricing by 2017 or the nextpricing period, by: (i) undertaking both
demand and supply side measures, such asproviding transparent and targeted subsidies,
and encouraging trading of contracts for gason the commodity exchanges in the country,
and (ii) abolishing the gas allocation policy

Fourteenth Finance Commission report tabled in Parliament

The report of the Fourteenth Finance Commission
was tabled in Parliament on February 24, 2015.11

The Finance Commission is a constitutional body
that is constituted once in five years, and gives
suggestions on centre-state financial relations,
among other things. Recommendations of the
Commission include:

The share of taxes of the centre to states to be
increased from 32% to 42%. Additional
budgetary needs of the states will be filled by
grants-in-aid to the states.
 Revenue compensation to states for theGoods and Services Tax (GST) should be forfive years. 100% compensation should bepaid to states in the first, second and thirdyears, 75% compensation for the fourth year,and 50% compensation should be paid in thefifth and final year.
 An autonomous and independent GSTCompensation Fund to be set up in order tofacilitate compensation to states.
 Fiscal deficit of states should be aimed at 3%of the GSDP, with a flexibility of 0.25% over
this limit. If the interest payments are lessthan or equal to 10% of revenue receipts in a
year, states will be eligible for an additionalborrowing limit of 10% of GSDP. A state
can avail of these additional limits only if ithas no revenue deficit for the year in whichthe limits are fixed, and the preceding year.
 The Fiscal Responsibility and BudgetManagement Act (FRBM), 2003 should beamended. The definition of effective revenuedeficit (difference between revenue deficitand grants for creation of capital assets)should be removed from the Act.
 The FRBM Act should be amended tomandate the creation of an independent fiscal
council to evaluate the fiscal policyimplications of budget proposals, before thebudget. States are advised to amend theirFRBM Acts in the same man

Win-win on land

Critics of the proposed amendments to the land acquisition Act of 2013 have conveniently sought to frame the debate in terms of a win-lose proposition. They contend that any benefits to non-farming entities - whether they be school-going children, patients seeking hospital care, households looking for affordable housing, small businesses or large corporations - would be at the expense of the farmers whose land is acquired. But they neglect the fact that the amendments are a win-win proposition.

Underlying the critics' view is the assumption that regardless of the compensation offered, farmers do not want to part with their land. Ergo, any change that simplifies or speeds up land acquisition hurts them.

But is this assumption right? A recent survey published by the non-governmental organisation (NGO) Lokniti offers some answers. According to it, when asked whether they like farming, 28 per cent of the farmers reply outright in the negative. Among the 72 per cent who reply in the affirmative, a whopping 60 per cent say that they like farming because it is their "traditional occupation". Only 10 per cent of them say that farming gives them good income. Most revealingly, 62 per cent of all farmers say that they would quit farming if they could get a good job in a city.

The responses of women and children in farmer households reinforce this picture. When asked if agricultural income is sufficient to fulfil livelihood needs, 67 per cent of the women reply in the negative. And a solid 76 per cent of the children of farmers say that they would prefer to take a profession other than farming. With the spread of education and enhanced access to information on the developments around the world, the young in farmer households have the same aspirations as their counterparts elsewhere in the world.

Therefore, in assessing the proposed amendments, the question we must ask is whether they are consistent with the ambitions and aspirations of the young, including those from farmer families; with the promotion of social goals underlying the projects for which land is to be acquired; and with the interests of the farmers whose land would be acquired.

Under the 2013 Act, all land acquisition for public-private-partnership (PPP) projects requires the prior consent of at least 70 per cent of the affected families. Similarly, all land acquisition for private companies for public purpose requires prior consent of 80 per cent of the affected families. In both instances, the 2013 Act also requires a lengthy, time-consuming social impact assessment.

Experts calculate that even if an acquisition under these provisions proceeds flawlessly with no legal challenges, NGO agitation or bureaucratic delays, it would take close to five years to complete. Since few land acquisitions have such a smooth ride, the actual time taken would be much longer. Such a long-drawn-out process is likely to deter even the most determined governments from undertaking a project that requires a private entity to play a role whether solely or in partnership with a public entity. Unsurprisingly, by all available accounts, land acquisition for PPP projects and for private companies for public purpose has come to a standstill since January 1, 2014, when the 2013 Act came into force. After coming to power, when the present central government conducted a consultation with state governments, chief ministers from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as well as non-BJP states overwhelmingly complained about the obstacles posed by the consent and social impact assessment provisions of the law.

Delays of this magnitude in every PPP project and private project for public purpose can be scarcely good for anyone. On the one hand, they render many otherwise viable public-purpose projects unviable, thereby undermining economic development in such critical areas as infrastructure, housing, education and health. On the other hand, they eliminate or substantially displace the government as a buyer of land, thus, leaving for-profit buyers as the only major players in the market. For farmers wishing to sell their land - and there are many of them who wish to do so - this is hardly good news. For, the price the private buyers offer under such circumstances is bound to fall well below the handsome compensation that the 2013 Act prescribes. Thus, under the current law, socially desirable projects suffer, as do aspirant children of the very farmers whom the law is designed to help - and with no benefit to the farmers themselves.

It is this major shortcoming that the proposed amendment Act aims to correct. It provides that the appropriate government authority be empowered to exempt PPP and private projects for public purpose from the consent and social impact assessment provisions in five socially critical areas. The areas proposed are eminently defensible: national security and defence; rural infrastructure, including electrification; affordable housing; industrial corridors; and infrastructure and social infrastructure under PPP projects in which the ownership of land remains with the government.

The other major amendment proposes to extend the high compensation and resettlement and rehabilitation provisions under the 2013 Act to areas currently outside its purview. In its current form, the 2013 Act exempts land acquisition under 13 statutes listed in the Fourth Schedule from all of its key provisions. The amendment Act provides for the elimination of the exemption as it relates to compensation and resettlement and rehabilitation of families. The amendment, thus, extends the higher compensation and resettlement and rehabilitation measures under the 2013 Act to a large percentage of farmers and affected families not currently covered.

Some critics have rhetorically asked how the present government, which only a year ago unanimously supported the 2013 Act, could propose to alter some of its provisions. This line of reasoning against the amendments invites two comments. First, when a well-intentioned law reveals itself to be against the national interest, a sensible government shows the courage to amend it rather than fear being called out for having made a mistake and impose the misery on its citizens that the law inflicts.

Second, a government considering a populist legislation must think twice about possible unintended negative consequences of the latter. For, in a democracy, once such legislation is tabled, it is extremely difficult for even the most vocal opponents of the government to oppose it. Who, for example, would dare oppose a legislation termed National Food Security Act no matter what flaws it might carry?

Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin)

Major schemes of the central government to improve rural sanitation

The central government has been implementing schemes to improve access to sanitation in rural areas from the Ist Five Year Plan (1951-56) onwards.  Major schemes of the central government dealing with rural sanitation are outlined below.

Central Rural Sanitation Programme (1986): The Central Rural Sanitation Programmewas one of the first schemes of the central government which focussed solely on rural sanitation.  The programme sought to construct household toilets, construct sanitary complexes for women, establish sanitary marts, and ensure solid and liquid waste management.

Total Sanitation Campaign (1999): The Total Sanitation Campaign was launched in 1999 with a greater focus on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) activities in order to make the creation of sanitation facilities demand driven rather than supply driven. Key components of the Total Sanitation Campaign included: (i) financial assistance to rural families below the poverty line for the construction of household toilets, (ii) construction of community sanitary complexes, (iii) construction of toilets in government schools and aganwadis, (iv) funds for IEC activities, (v) assistance to rural sanitary marts, and (vi) solid and liquid waste management.

Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (2012): In 2012, the Total Sanitation Campaign was replaced by theNirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA), which also focused on the previous elements.  According to the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, the key shifts in NBA were: (i) a greater focus on coverage for the whole community instead of a focus on individual houses, (ii) the inclusion of certain households which were above the poverty line, and (iii) more funds for IEC activities, with 15% of funds at the district level earmarked for IEC.

Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) (2014): Earlier this year, in October, NBA was replaced by Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) (SBM-G) which is a sub-mission under Swachh Bharat Mission.  SBM-G also includes the key components of the earlier sanitation schemes such as the funding for the construction of individual household toilets, construction of community sanitary complexes, waste management, and IEC. Key features of SBM-G, and major departures from earlier sanitation schemes, are outlined in the next section.

III. Guidelines for Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin)

The guidelines for SBM-G, released earlier this month, outline the strategy to be adopted for its implementation, funding, and monitoring.

Objectives: Key objectives of SBM-G include: (i) improving the quality of life in rural areas through promoting cleanliness and eliminating open defecation by 2019, (ii) motivating communities and panchayati raj institutions to adopt sustainable sanitation practices, (iii) encouraging appropriate technologies for sustainable sanitation, and (iv) developing community managed solid and liquid waste management systems.

Institutional framework: While NBA had a four tier implementation mechanism at the state, district, village, and block level, an additional tier has been added for SBM-G, at the national level.  Thus, the implementation mechanisms at the five levels will consist of: (i) National Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin), (ii) State Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin), (iii) District Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin), (iv) Block Programme Management Unit, and (v) Gram Panchayat/Village and Water Sanitation Committee.  At the Gram Panchayat level, Swachhta Doots may be hired to assist with activities such as identification of beneficiaries, IEC, and maintenance of records.

Planning: As was done under NBA, each state must prepare an Annual State Implementation Plan.  Gram Panchayats must prepare implementation plans, which will be consolidated into Block Implementation Plans.  These Block Implementation Plans will further be consolidated into District Implementation Plans.  Finally, District Implementation Plans will be consolidated in a State Implementation Plan by the State Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin).

A Plan Approval Committee in Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation will review the State Implementation Plans.  The final State Implementation Plan will be prepared by states based on the allocation of funds, and then approved by National Scheme Sanctioning Committee of the Ministry.

Funding: Funding for SBM-G will be through budgetary allocations of the central and state governments, the Swachh Bharat Kosh, and multilateral agencies.  The Swachh Bharat Kosh has been established to collect funds from non-governmental sources.  Table 3, below, details the fund sharing pattern for SBM-G between the central and state government, as provided for in the SBM-G guidelines.